Digital

Belfast High Court agrees to dismiss Troubles document proceedings

The proceedings centred on the disclosure of files relating to three killings during The Troubles

A Belfast High Court judge agreed to dismiss proceedings centred on the disclosure of files relating to three killings during The Troubles after being told a full review of the material has been carried out.

The case, which focused on who had legal authority for releasing the papers, was seen as a test of devolved powers.

Lawyers for Secretary of State Theresa Villiers and Chief Constable Matt Baggott took action after Culture Minister Carál Ní Chuilín delivered inquest and court files to victims' group Relatives for Justice and KRW Law firm.

They had wanted circulation blocked until the documents could be examined for any potential security risks.

The papers are connected to three deaths stretching back more than 40 years.

They include the British army shooting of IRA man Paddy McAdorey in Belfast in 1971, the killing of student Michael Donnelly by a plastic bullet in 1980, and the loyalist murder of Sarah Larmour a year earlier.

Ms Ní Chuilín's department has responsibility for the Public Records Office where the papers are held.

Concerns centred on the possible disclosure of any sensitive information on members of the security forces.

A temporary injunction was secured during an emergency late-night hearing in August, which came hours after the minister made the handover.

KRW Law and Relatives for Justice then gave undertakings to take all immediate steps to request retrieval of the papers from victims' families.

As the case returned to court today for an update Attorney General John Larkin QC appeared on behalf of the minister.

It was due to proceed by way of a construction summons - a method of determining the law on who has responsibility for disclosing the documents.

But Tony McGleenan QC, for Ms Villiers and the Chief Constable, instead asked for the case to be dismissed.

He told Mr Justice Stephens his clients have now had time to look at the documents and no longer regarded the injunction as necessary.

Judgment was then entered for the defendants along with costs for all of them except the minister, who made no application.